"If Everyone Hates Obamacare, Then Why Are Its Customers So Happy?"

[sportage]

Again, it depends on the state.
If a state has a reasonable number of partaking providers, then there will be a policy that is affordable.
The mention of policies that are not affordable would be in a state where few providers take part.
Supposedly come 2015 another 77 providers will take part.
More choice.

Obviously, the ACA reforms along with ACA itself has great potential.
And in 4 to 5 years, could mean a lot of hope for millions to finally get healthcare.
And less burden on those with employer based insurance reducing the number of the uninsured that impacts rates for everyone else.

But most likely none of us will ever see that day with healthcare access for all.
Either the republican congress will cripple Obamacare, or the Supreme Court.
And there we are, back to square one.
Millions uninsured, outrageous premiums for employer based insurance, and the ER as the only option for those uninsured.
Gawd, I wish Obamacare had been created by a white president.
Then just maybe republicans would give it a chance to succeed.

 

[boomerang]

I wonder what exactly is the point of these threads? Scope around, find some good numbers and polls from happy people that are happy because somebody else is footing the expense and post it all in a thread for what? Justification? Obamacare is here and it will survive or fail on its own. The SCOTUS will rule in June and if the decision goes as many predict it will, Obamacare will collapse under its own weight.

Polls do not change that the legislation was poorly written by folks like Jonathan Gruber, with Obama's input, as well as input from other Democrat operatives. It was voted on by what Gruber terms "stupid Americans" that being 100% of the Democrats with zero Republican votes. The mistakes in the bill are glaring and plentiful and they have more than likely doomed it to failure. There is only one party to assess blame to and the nation sent them a message a few weeks back.

Why are those on the left on a seemingly never-ending quest to put lipstick on this pig? What is the end game? I just don't get what psychology is behind thread after thread touting how wonderful this poorly crafted, horribly implemented and fatally flawed piece of legislation that was crammed down the throats of the nation in the dead of night by a political party who feels that Americans would be too stupid to see through it. Oh and needless to say, many of us did see through it.

I also can't believe that there is no thread on Jonathan Gruber. Four videos to date have been unearthed with him touting the deception used in the crafting of the bill and how it relied on the stupidity of Americans. In one video he talks about Obama's involvement in the process and how that resulted in the Cadillac Tax lie.

The legislation was built around a core of lies and deception. Both endearing qualities to those on the left we all know. But the voters have said enough is enough. Will Democrats get with the times and decide to get on board on the right side of the issues or will they continue their pattern of lies and deceit? Can a Leopard change it's spots? Stay tuned.

Obamacare -- the Truth is Out

 

[sMiLeYz]

I wonder what exactly is the point of these threads?

This one actually has a point unlike the one you posted about 10 minutes ago.

 

[boomerang]

This one actually has a point unlike the one you posted about 10 minutes ago.

Ahh, let the butthurt flow through you... LOL!

 

[jhu]

48% of our people are on the Government tit.

This isn't winning.

-John

It's actually closer to 100% depending on how far back the money flow is tracked.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's an interesting spin. Lets put a little perspective behind this. Before the ACA we had by conservative estimates 40 million uninsured. One year after two of the major hurdles for getting insurance were removed (pre-existing conditions and cost reductions through subsidies) and even a fine for non-compliance tacked on we managed to get 4 million or so of them covered, or basically 10%. Looks like a lot of customers weren't happy so they didn't buy it.

If that's what people want to push, then push that. I sure as hell don't remember hearing many people saying the ACA isn't going to work without massive Medicaid expansions when this was getting sold to the American people.

The actual increase in coverage is more like 10M peeople-

HHS estimates that thanks to Obamacare, more than 10 million more people are now covered by private health insurance, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program than before.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/05/states-obamacare_n_5650606.html

Unsurprisingly, it works better in states that haven't actively obstructed implementation.

What you don't remember is merely a matter of convenience, like Reagan & Iran-Contra.

 

[Jhhnn]

I wonder what exactly is the point of these threads? Scope around, find some good numbers and polls from happy people that are happy because somebody else is footing the expense and post it all in a thread for what? Justification? Obamacare is here and it will survive or fail on its own. The SCOTUS will rule in June and if the decision goes as many predict it will, Obamacare will collapse under its own weight.

Polls do not change that the legislation was poorly written by folks like Jonathan Gruber, with Obama's input, as well as input from other Democrat operatives. It was voted on by what Gruber terms "stupid Americans" that being 100% of the Democrats with zero Republican votes. The mistakes in the bill are glaring and plentiful and they have more than likely doomed it to failure. There is only one party to assess blame to and the nation sent them a message a few weeks back.

Why are those on the left on a seemingly never-ending quest to put lipstick on this pig? What is the end game? I just don't get what psychology is behind thread after thread touting how wonderful this poorly crafted, horribly implemented and fatally flawed piece of legislation that was crammed down the throats of the nation in the dead of night by a political party who feels that Americans would be too stupid to see through it. Oh and needless to say, many of us did see through it.

I also can't believe that there is no thread on Jonathan Gruber. Four videos to date have been unearthed with him touting the deception used in the crafting of the bill and how it relied on the stupidity of Americans. In one video he talks about Obama's involvement in the process and how that resulted in the Cadillac Tax lie.

The legislation was built around a core of lies and deception. Both endearing qualities to those on the left we all know. But the voters have said enough is enough. Will Democrats get with the times and decide to get on board on the right side of the issues or will they continue their pattern of lies and deceit? Can a Leopard change it's spots? Stay tuned.

Nice empty rant, employing all the right wing touchstones. The only one of much interest is about the SCOTUS, whose legislating from the bench created the basis for the current suit in the first place. Had the mandatory creation of state exchanges & medicaid expansion been allowed to stand, the current suit simply could not exist. The rest is basically paraphrasing Limbaugh.

Gruber? Heh. What he points out about estimating the cost of Obamacare was employed in Dubya's expansion of Medicare in 2003-

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/u...-dirty-little-secret.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Righties in general seem to have very convenient memories. When Dems use the same methods as Repubs, it's akin to baby raping, but only when Dems do it. Repubs get a pass, obviously. Somehow, Righties just can't seem to recall any of that.

 

[brycejones]

Replace "insured" with Governed. Because as soon as Government "insures" you, they can Govern you. They can tell you when, why, and how, to do anything.

They enforce it with the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines (and Coast Guard.)

We are so fucked.

-John

LOL

 

[Matt1970]

The actual increase in coverage is more like 10M peeople-



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/05/states-obamacare_n_5650606.html

Unsurprisingly, it works better in states that haven't actively obstructed implementation.

What you don't remember is merely a matter of convenience, like Reagan & Iran-Contra.

LOL, are the parts you are not reading a matter convenience?

From the poll in your own link.

Uninsured rate was 14.4% in the third quarter of 2008.
Uninsured rate was 13.4% in the second quarter of 2014.

1% of the population is actually less than 4 Million, but who's counting?

 

[sMiLeYz]

Ahh, let the butthurt flow through you... LOL!

Whos butthurt? Are you projecting again?

I'm merely pointing out the irony of where you question the point of a thread on a topic which impacts everyday American lives... yet you post a thread which has no impact on American lives and nor has any relevance to anything whatsoever. Meaning it has no point. Do you know what Irony is?

 

[sactoking]

The charts seem to be a bunch of "well duh." For example in the second chart people with exchange policies are more satisfied with the cost than people without exchange policies. Well, people with exchange policies tended to be poorer and unhealthier. Some couldn't get insurance at all. That they got insurance, and tax credits to boot, leafs them to be happy. Those without exchange policies tended to be wealthier and healthier. Their costs went up due to the single unified risk pool. Of course they're relatively less happy.

 

[boomerang]

Whos butthurt? Are you projecting again?

I'm merely pointing out the irony of where you question the point of a thread on a topic which impacts everyday American lives... yet you post a thread which has no impact on American lives and nor has any relevance to anything whatsoever. Meaning it has no point. Do you know what Irony is?

I can see that this is very important to you and I want to thank you for sharing this with us today.

 

[fskimospy]

The charts seem to be a bunch of "well duh." For example in the second chart people with exchange policies are more satisfied with the cost than people without exchange policies. Well, people with exchange policies tended to be poorer and unhealthier. Some couldn't get insurance at all. That they got insurance, and tax credits to boot, leafs them to be happy. Those without exchange policies tended to be wealthier and healthier. Their costs went up due to the single unified risk pool. Of course they're relatively less happy.

I don't think it was intended to be a comparison of who was happier. Frequently conservatives have tried to say that the plans purchased on the exchanges were terrible. If the average person is happy with both the quality and cost, that seems to not be the case.

 

[manimal]

Frank Lutz says Obamacare took our jerbs so of course perception is different from reality. What I am amazed at is how rampant it still is.

 

[Jhhnn]

LOL, are the parts you are not reading a matter convenience?

From the poll in your own link.

Uninsured rate was 14.4% in the third quarter of 2008.
Uninsured rate was 13.4% in the second quarter of 2014.

1% of the population is actually less than 4 Million, but who's counting?

Not just a convenient memory, but convenient reading skills as well.

You dispute HHS numbers with what, exactly? A survey useful only in ascertaining satisfaction rate?

You use 2008 numbers as a basis of comparison when the uninsured rate peaked much higher in 2013 following a long standing trend?

Struggling to maintain a coherent argument? Obviously. Another beautiful thing about Righties, at least for their leadership, is that once they Believe, they believe, even if it means getting stuck on stupid.

One of the things about exchange plans is that they're very good for people who become unemployed. Cobra coverage only lasts 6 months, and is an all or nothing deal. So taking that option means you're paying full boat prices if you started out with a really solid employer sponsored benefits package with dental, vision, legal, you name it. Exchange plans are just health insurance, and are a lot more inexpensive. You don't have to wait for an open enrollment period if you have a life changing event, like unemployment or retirement. Eligibility doesn't run out, either. Subsidies are based on your reduced income, as well, meaning you can likely return to work having exhausted fewer resources in the meanwhile. When you get there, pre-existing conditions are covered as well, thanks to the ACA.

 

[Matt1970]

Not just a convenient memory, but convenient reading skills as well.

You dispute HHS numbers with what, exactly? A survey useful only in ascertaining satisfaction rate?

You use 2008 numbers as a basis of comparison when the uninsured rate peaked much higher in 2013 following a long standing trend?

Struggling to maintain a coherent argument? Obviously. Another beautiful thing about Righties, at least for their leadership, is that once they Believe, they believe, even if it means getting stuck on stupid.

One of the things about exchange plans is that they're very good for people who become unemployed. Cobra coverage only lasts 6 months, and is an all or nothing deal. So taking that option means you're paying full boat prices if you started out with a really solid employer sponsored benefits package with dental, vision, legal, you name it. Exchange plans are just health insurance, and are a lot more inexpensive. You don't have to wait for an open enrollment period if you have a life changing event, like unemployment or retirement. Eligibility doesn't run out, either. Subsidies are based on your reduced income, as well, meaning you can likely return to work having exhausted fewer resources in the meanwhile. When you get there, pre-existing conditions are covered as well, thanks to the ACA.

Fine, call it 10 million then. When the problem is 48 million, does 10 million really fix the problem?

 

[ZippZ]

Reason for the difference in polls depends on who you ask. If Obamacare gives you an advantage: prior medical condition, receiving subsidized insurance, older individual then you are probably going to be happy. If it gives you a disadvantage: young healthy adult, unsubsidized insurance, don't want insurance, business owner, then you are probably not going to be happy. Basically the disadvantaged group has to pay for the insurance of the advantaged group.

News reported 85% of Obamacare signups receive subsidized insurance, then add in the prior medical condition population and you have your positive Obamacare poll numbers for those enrolled. If you poll the general population, then the numbers go the other way because those are the ones that are forced to get healthcare that they don't want, pay the penalty tax, or pay for other peoples health insurance.

I don't like laws that force people to pay for other peoples stuff, but if there was a law that forced my neighbor to buy me a new car, it would be difficult to turn that down.

 

[ivwshane]

Reason for the difference in polls depends on who you ask. If Obamacare gives you an advantage: prior medical condition, receiving subsidized insurance, older individual then you are probably going to be happy. If it gives you a disadvantage: young healthy adult, unsubsidized insurance, don't want insurance, business owner, then you are probably not going to be happy. Basically the disadvantaged group has to pay for the insurance of the advantaged group.

News reported 85% of Obamacare signups receive subsidized insurance, then add in the prior medical condition population and you have your positive Obamacare poll numbers for those enrolled. If you poll the general population, then the numbers go the other way because those are the ones that are forced to get healthcare that they don't want, pay the penalty tax, or pay for other peoples health insurance.

I don't like laws that force people to pay for other peoples stuff, but if there was a law that forced my neighbor to buy me a new car, it would be difficult to turn that down.

Since most people get their health care through their employer it's not an even split in the subsidized through the government and non subsidized plans.

The way insurance works is by creating large pools of users, more people means the costs are spread out. What we end up with is those that previously could get insurance now can, those that paid for their insurance now either pay less or they get more for the same or slightly more than they paid before.

People confuse private, sponsored, and public health insurance and they don't understand how or who pays what or who and how people get subsidies.

 

[OverVolt]

..

 

[ZippZ]

Since most people get their health care through their employer it's not an even split in the subsidized through the government and non subsidized plans.

The way insurance works is by creating large pools of users, more people means the costs are spread out. What we end up with is those that previously could get insurance now can, those that paid for their insurance now either pay less or they get more for the same or slightly more than they paid before.

People confuse private, sponsored, and public health insurance and they don't understand how or who pays what or who and how people get subsidies.

I'm not confused on the different types of insurance. I don't have a problem with more people getting insurance as long as other people aren't forced to pay for other peoples insurance. Problem I have is other taxpayers have to pay the subsidies...the subsidies are separate from the cost of health insurance. People who don't want coverage or want minimal coverage are forced pay for a plan they don't want (I thought this was america land of the free?) or pay the penalty tax (which funds the subsidies).

 

[ivwshane]

I'm not confused on the different types of insurance. I don't have a problem with more people getting insurance as long as other people aren't forced to pay for other peoples insurance. Problem I have is other taxpayers have to pay the subsidies...the subsidies are separate from the cost of health insurance. People who don't want coverage or want minimal coverage are forced pay for a plan they don't want (I thought this was america land of the free?) or pay the penalty tax (which funds the subsidies).

Then you don't understand how insurance works.

If you think an insurance based health care sucks then what's a better alternative?

 

[ivwshane]

I put in gender male and it asked if I was pregnant.

At least my nonexistent children have dental coverage.

I'm assuming thats why my premium will go up $50 my deductible will double and everything that used to be a copay including inpatient care is now rife with coinsurance.

And somewhere I would imagine there is someone with 25 kids who all have ADHD so she goes and picks up her 750 ritalin a month and probably sells them $10 each.

So you are advocating what exactly?

 

[Jhhnn]

Fine, call it 10 million then. When the problem is 48 million, does 10 million really fix the problem?

It helps, and it'd help a lot more if all states were part of the medicaid expansion.

 

[Jadow]

the people that love it are getting it for like 40 bucks a month thanks to the taxpayers.

 

[JEDIYoda]

the people that love it are getting it for like 40 bucks a month thanks to the taxpayers.

no clue again......links please???